As far as I know, Lightroom only imports images in their original format with the exception of the ability to covert the proprietary raw format into the dng raw format. Any conversion would have to be done on export. This is my understanding, but I do not claim to understand everything correctly.

Converting to TIFF is a bad idea anyway. They have 3-6 times the size of DNG files and have lost a lot of info in the original file.

If you have TIFFs Lightroom would import them, but if you voluntarily choose TIFF over raw or DNG than I think Lightroom is not the program you should use, because the basic philosophy behind Lightroom is that it is a parametric workflow based on raw images.

As far as I know, Lightroom only imports images in their original format with the exception of the ability to covert the proprietary raw format into the dng raw format. Any conversion would have to be done on export. This is my understanding, but I do not claim to understand everything correctly.

Both previous responses are excellent. And yes, when you import into Lightroom you can Copy as DNG, Move or Add. Three out of four will import your images in their native format. The only way to import .tif files into Lightroom is to have .tif files to import. You can if you desire Export .tif files out of Lightroom.

Mike.

Logged

If your mind is attuned to beauty, you find beauty in everything.~ Jean Cooke ~

There is no way to convert a RAW file to a TIFF file on import in Lightroom.As stated a RAW file can be exported as a TIFF.As alluded to there is no advantage to converting a RAW file to a TIFF file for the purposes of editing in Lightroom.

BTW for detail purposes the DNG specification has similarities to a TIFF file anyway.

Perhaps if you could explain why it seems important to convert your RAW files to TIFF file a better response could be given.

T...As alluded to there is no advantage to converting a RAW file to a TIFF file for the purposes of editing in Lightroom.

...

Tony Jay

Jusy curious, how about the reverse? Would there be any advantage you could think of to converting TIF to DNG when bringing them into LR? Got a bunch of old Kodak PCD files and wondering what's the best format to get them into for long term archiving since there are so few apps around that can read PCD and the number is dwindling with the passage of time. If DNG is a good bet for the long run, I can't do PCD->DNG directly in LR but I can still convert PCD->TIF->DNG going via ACDSee or an older version of Photoshop for the first step.

A TIFF is not a raw file. DNG is intended for raw files. Now, there is something called linear DNG, which is a demosaiced raw file and it may be possible to manipulate a TIFF or any other file into a linear DNG, but I think it would be of zero utility and could cause a lot of problems. I would not even try.

Jusy curious, how about the reverse? Would there be any advantage you could think of to converting TIF to DNG when bringing them into LR? Got a bunch of old Kodak PCD files and wondering what's the best format to get them into for long term archiving since there are so few apps around that can read PCD and the number is dwindling with the passage of time. If DNG is a good bet for the long run, I can't do PCD->DNG directly in LR but I can still convert PCD->TIF->DNG going via ACDSee or an older version of Photoshop for the first step.

Jusy curious, how about the reverse? Would there be any advantage you could think of to converting TIF to DNG when bringing them into LR?

No, not really. You don't gain any flexibility. The TIFF files you have are already baked in. Think of TIFF as a better form of JPEG. Would you convert JPEGs to DNG and expect a benefit? DNG, as Eric said, is another form of raw file. Once you have a fully cooked image file like TIFF or JPEG, you can't go back. If you overcook a roast in the oven, you can't pull it out, put it back in the fridge, take it out when it's cold and try to re-roast it.

I don't think one can be dogmatic nowadays about DNG being intended for raw files. Everyone did understand DNG was just for raw files, but that's not been a simple distinction for some time. - you've been able to store JPEGs as DNGs, for example. Adobe are now making it even less clear with lossy DNG formats, and you've already got the beginnings of parametric ways to handle HDR and stitching.

Jusy curious, how about the reverse? Would there be any advantage you could think of to converting TIF to DNG when bringing them into LR?

@Steve House On balance, some. By saving those old original files as DNGs, you're making it much more obvious to yourself that these files are originals, while you might keep TIF for worked files. I find it handy to save scanned film images as DNGs and use it for the few JPEG originals I shoot. I instantly recognize DNGs as originals, and can and filter on them in Lightroom, for example. Because these scans or JPEGs are now DNG, there's no chance I'll overwrite the original image data in Photoshop.